Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Attorney Independence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Council overrules mayor's veto of city-attorney independence charter amendment
Summary
The New Orleans City Council voted unanimously to overrule the mayor's veto and advance an amendment to the home rule charter addressing the independence and duties of the city attorney; public commenters supported more independence for the law department.
Get email alerts on the City Attorney Independence topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The New Orleans City Council voted 7-0 to overrule the mayor’s veto and adopt an ordinance (3000410 MCS, calendar 35001 66) that would amend the home rule charter’s language on the independence of the city attorney and related governance provisions.
The ordinance, presented for reconsideration after a mayoral veto, would amend section 4-406 of the home rule charter to clarify the city attorney’s primary client identity, to require consultation across branches of government where appropriate and to prohibit conflicting representation without consent, according to the materials read into the record.
A council member briefly disputed a point in the veto message, saying that “an amendment to the charter cannot violate the charter because the amendment is actually changing the charter.” The council member then moved to adopt the ordinance; the motion carried on a 7-0 vote.
Justin Schmidt, a resident who spoke in support during public comment, said the change did not go far enough but backed the override because of concerns that the law department had represented the mayor in matters he viewed as private. “There are systematic problems with the law department representing the mayor in a matter that has really nothing to do with the city,” Schmidt said, describing ongoing litigation that he said raised questions about office independence.
Meeting materials identified the ordinance as calendar number 35001 66 and ordinance number 3000410 MCS and described the amendment as clarifying the city attorney’s duties, requiring independent legal judgment when branches conflict, and restricting conflicting representation without appropriate consent.
The council’s recorded vote registered seven yeas and no nays; no individual roll-call names were recorded in the excerpted vote announcement. The ordinance will take effect as specified by municipal code and any applicable charter procedures.

